The present invention relates to sections of highway traffic infrastructures, including structures carrying solar energy (SE) systems, eventually also other renewable energy systems (RES), automatic signaling and/or lighting systems, and, eventually, other traffic assistance systems (TAS).
Installing RES along traffic infra-structures presents important benefits, especially in areas of high population densities. On the one hand, integration of RES into urban settings is important in view of inherent proximity to high energy demand density areas, and traffic infra-structures represent significant areas with solar exposure. On the other hand, many traffic accidents result from deficient signaling or visibility conditions, in particular as related to static conditions such as certain topographic and infrastructure design features, or to dynamic conditions such as hazardous weather, traffic flow intensity, and accidents along a traffic way.
There have been many suggestions of installing RES, in particular photovoltaic (PV) devices or arrays along roads, mostly using dividing barriers and sound barriers—see EP 0 774 168 B1—, and tunnel or tunnel-like structures—see DE 101 25 147 A1, DE 203 17 683 U1—and over circulation lanes—see DE 44 17 065 A1, DE 44 31 154 C3.
The DE 3412584 A1 discloses a T-shape structure carrying solar energy panels, and also general lighting and traffic surveillance means, approximately in a common plane at an elevated level over a highway. The fundamental aspect of this design is its continuous, regular repetition over very substantial highway lengths. While maximizing PV area per kilometer, it presents major disadvantages. In terms of driving comfort, it substantially obstructs the upper view field of drivers over substantial lengths, producing monotonic shades, with accentuated light/dark contrast areas, eventually leading to visual discomfort. In terms of driving safety, the ever regular repetition of vertical trusses does not communicate varying road conditions, such as curves, slopes, injunctions, or recommended driving speed, eventually leading to fatigue and inattention. In terms of integration into local (urban) landscape, its constant shape and size eliminates diversity opportunities along several road sections in a given region thereby assisting orientation across it. Because of its “great wall” nature, such a continuous built volume is of reduced applicability to urban settings. Its central positioning is not adequate to certain traffic infrastructure typologies. Moreover, this design does not include lighting and/or traffic monitoring means at a road circulation level (e.g., in the supporting beams) nor does it disclose their variable distribution according to locations of varying requirements along a longer extension of a traffic way (reduced applicability to highway settings). Therefore, these traffic-aid structures do not address respective impacts upon driving comfort and upon local (urban) landscape—two factors fundamentally determining their benefits and potential. In fact, for structures of such dimensions, extending over substantial lengths, respective design and distribution along a traffic infrastructure is a crucial aspect determining driving comfort, passive and active traffic safety possibilities, and better integration into a given road typology and respective urban surroundings, while further ensuring the benefits from combining renewable energy and traffic assistance means along such traffic infrastructures.
None of the aforementioned documents discloses a solution in consideration of the aforementioned design aspects, to refurbish substantial lengths of traffic infrastructures with such structures.